When AARP announced it was supporting ObamaCare several years ago, the organization — which purports to represent the interests of America’s senior citizens — was flooded with cancellation. That may be why, prior to the presidential election, AARP expressed a willingness to consider benefit cuts in order to save Social Security and Medicare.

Then last week came an Associated Press news report noting that, instead of standing firm as it did on ObamaCare, AARP had buckled to demands from members and liberal groups to flatly oppose any benefit reductions for the nation’s retirees. But what is more two-faced than this turnaround is AARP’s lame pretense that by doing so it is protecting the interests of younger Americans, far from retirement age.

It would be one thing if AARP was simply drawing a singular line in the sand — no changes for anyone currently receiving benefits or someone nearing retirement age. Protecting those who no longer have the ability to significantly grow their retirement savings is a sane, sensible and fair position to take. Frankly, it is a no-brainer that drew bipartisan support during this past election season.

As a result, the real issue is the benefit schedule for younger Americans and whether — unchanged — Social Security and Medicare will exist in 40-50 years when today’s twenty-somethings, also referred to as millennials, come of age.

A 2011 study conducted by the St. Norbert College Strategic Research Institute found that for those 18-29 years old 50 percent do not think Social Security will exist when their time comes. This belief is supported by numbers independently issued by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, if nothing changes.

The St. Norbert study was commissioned by iOMe Challenge, a professional and academic organization formed to engage and challenge young people to begin thinking about their future. According to iOMe, the findings suggest that “there has never been a more important time than now to engage millennials in helping to solve the financial challenges we face in the U.S. and the potential problems they face in retirement years.” To that end iOMe Challenge says it is working to engage “young people to understand financial problems and find creative (emphasis added) ways of solving them.”

Readers should note the emphasis we have placed on the word “creative.” It is an overridingly important word missing from AARP’s lexicon.

If AARP were to have its way, the horse and buggy would still be our primary mode of travel.

Now is not the time for Congress nor groups which honestly represent the interests of future retirees to emulate the Ludites of the 19th century who protested the Industrial Age.

Social Security and Medicare were appropriate bi-products of that age, of the Industrial Revolution. But just as much of that time has been outmoded by the Computer Age, so too will Social Security and Medicare if little or nothing changes — as AARP demands.

Truth be told, AARP looks to only be in it for the money. Spokesmen brushed off the massive number of cancellations after the ObamaCare announcement as largely part of its normal membership turnover. That leads us to think AARP leadership must have stood in greater fear of threatened cancellations when announced support for benefit changes last year.

Perhaps then, part of the answer to the Social Security/Medicare dilemma may be to allow AARP to go the way of the dinosaur so that a fair and open debate can take place. For those interested in an alternative, visit Amac — the Voice of Americans 50+ at amac.us.